Mild "spoilers" ahead.
There's a cruel lack of understanding of context and relations between mechanics here, mimicking the mechanics of some surface-level namedrop not only never reinforces any point it's trying to make, but also ends up creating completely disjointed gameplay, that's a pretty strong contradiction.
Game design is supposed to shape an experience based on how different mechanics answer each other, it's always been a matter of context and good use of its elements, the assertion that any kind of HUD or linear level design fundamentally conflicts with any sort of emotional implication is a seriously flawed argument.
If anything, the final claim about how "Shadow of the Colossus is the greatest game of all time" (objectivity in any art-related writing is pretty eliminatory) without ever mentioning the game beforehand, even as an example, shows that this essay/study comes from the place of someone having just discovered what subtractive design is and who holds it as some sort of golden standard, if it certainly encompasses interactive storytelling, I can only hope the impact it had on the writer's view of narration will lead them to realize how expandable it is instead of restrictive.
There's a cruel lack of understanding of context and relations between mechanics here, mimicking the mechanics of some surface-level namedrop not only never reinforces any point it's trying to make, but also ends up creating completely disjointed gameplay, that's a pretty strong contradiction.
Game design is supposed to shape an experience based on how different mechanics answer each other, it's always been a matter of context and good use of its elements, the assertion that any kind of HUD or linear level design fundamentally conflicts with any sort of emotional implication is a seriously flawed argument.
If anything, the final claim about how "Shadow of the Colossus is the greatest game of all time" (objectivity in any art-related writing is pretty eliminatory) without ever mentioning the game beforehand, even as an example, shows that this essay/study comes from the place of someone having just discovered what subtractive design is and who holds it as some sort of golden standard, if it certainly encompasses interactive storytelling, I can only hope the impact it had on the writer's view of narration will lead them to realize how expandable it is instead of restrictive.
13 Comments
@NascarRedSox
Claiming that a piece of art is "the greatest of all time" in its medium is not the way you word an opinion but rather a fact, which is something you generally want to avoid doing in art-related writing given its subjective nature by definition.
"This is how Shadow of the Colossus pushed boundaries in interactive storytelling" or "This is why Shadow of the Colossus is my favorite game of all time" would have been far more appropriate (more something along the lines of the former in an essay), especially considering how he didn't develop any point about the game and only mentioned it once in the very end.
Claiming that a piece of art is "the greatest of all time" in its medium is not the way you word an opinion but rather a fact, which is something you generally want to avoid doing in art-related writing given its subjective nature by definition.
"This is how Shadow of the Colossus pushed boundaries in interactive storytelling" or "This is why Shadow of the Colossus is my favorite game of all time" would have been far more appropriate (more something along the lines of the former in an essay), especially considering how he didn't develop any point about the game and only mentioned it once in the very end.
I understand, but I see nothing wrong about that. Even an essay has its own right to contradict itself.
I think you should mark both your review and your comment as spoilers, by the way.
@NascarRedSox
An essay contradicting itself is not the same as making an antithesis, if the demonstration goes directly against the point you're trying to make without acknowledging it, the whole thing loses any kind of value and can reveal a lack of understanding and/or critical thinking on the subject matter.
Contradictory assertions are usually an instant-killer of any piece of critical writing.
An essay contradicting itself is not the same as making an antithesis, if the demonstration goes directly against the point you're trying to make without acknowledging it, the whole thing loses any kind of value and can reveal a lack of understanding and/or critical thinking on the subject matter.
Contradictory assertions are usually an instant-killer of any piece of critical writing.
Interaction Isn't Explicit has the same value with its contradictions than what it would have without them. If it's a game, it's art; and if it's an essay, we can agree or disagree.
Reading your new review now, I would like to point out that the author doesn't mention the last game... with words. The boss before is a direct reference to the game.
That said, I'm not against your review and the rating. You didn't like the game and we have different opinions, nothing else.
Reading your new review now, I would like to point out that the author doesn't mention the last game... with words. The boss before is a direct reference to the game.
That said, I'm not against your review and the rating. You didn't like the game and we have different opinions, nothing else.
@NascarRedSox
"Interaction Isn't Explicit has the same value with its contradictions than what it would have without them"
I mean, it would not ? In that case it's not so much about agreeing with the essay or not but the fact that it just can't get its point across since the gameplay proves itself wrong, it might serve as an illustration at best, but definitely NOT as a demonstration.
"If it's a game, it's art; and if it's an essay, we can agree or disagree."
Never said the opposite, the thing is, even though there's no right way to make art, there are actual ways of writing a paper and making an argument. Nothing wrong with having an opinion on an essay if it's built correctly, but it's pretty hard to argue when the said essay can't even hold itself together in the first place.
"I would like to point out that the author doesn't mention the last game... with words. The boss before is a direct reference to the game."
Same, a patchwork of ideas without any cohesion or guidance doesn't make for compelling game design, since the essay doesn't build towards a conclusion where mentioning Shadow of the Colossus would make sense (not that it couldn't have tho), throwing a boss that doesn't exemplify a culmination of its ideas simply ends up feeling out of place.
"That said, I'm not against your review and the rating. You didn't like the game and we have different opinions, nothing else."
Don't worry, it's fine I didn't take it personally or anything (same goes with you, I know some of my comments might sound a bit harsh, really sorry if that's the case). But in that case I don't think the discussion revolved around the actual game and more about how to write a proper paper, which definitely narrows the variety of opinions one can have.
"Interaction Isn't Explicit has the same value with its contradictions than what it would have without them"
I mean, it would not ? In that case it's not so much about agreeing with the essay or not but the fact that it just can't get its point across since the gameplay proves itself wrong, it might serve as an illustration at best, but definitely NOT as a demonstration.
"If it's a game, it's art; and if it's an essay, we can agree or disagree."
Never said the opposite, the thing is, even though there's no right way to make art, there are actual ways of writing a paper and making an argument. Nothing wrong with having an opinion on an essay if it's built correctly, but it's pretty hard to argue when the said essay can't even hold itself together in the first place.
"I would like to point out that the author doesn't mention the last game... with words. The boss before is a direct reference to the game."
Same, a patchwork of ideas without any cohesion or guidance doesn't make for compelling game design, since the essay doesn't build towards a conclusion where mentioning Shadow of the Colossus would make sense (not that it couldn't have tho), throwing a boss that doesn't exemplify a culmination of its ideas simply ends up feeling out of place.
"That said, I'm not against your review and the rating. You didn't like the game and we have different opinions, nothing else."
Don't worry, it's fine I didn't take it personally or anything (same goes with you, I know some of my comments might sound a bit harsh, really sorry if that's the case). But in that case I don't think the discussion revolved around the actual game and more about how to write a proper paper, which definitely narrows the variety of opinions one can have.
Hi,
Thanks for playing. As I mentioned in another comment, I also agree that some of the language can sound a bit obnoxious depending on how you look at it. There's no reason why not to change those texts in a patch, so I'll try to update it while also addressing some issues with the controls and bugs.
While I disagree with many of the points you mentioned(especially the HUD one), I'll try to keep track of these criticisms for the next time.
Thanks a lot.
Thanks for playing. As I mentioned in another comment, I also agree that some of the language can sound a bit obnoxious depending on how you look at it. There's no reason why not to change those texts in a patch, so I'll try to update it while also addressing some issues with the controls and bugs.
While I disagree with many of the points you mentioned(especially the HUD one), I'll try to keep track of these criticisms for the next time.
Thanks a lot.
@Frank_L
Hey, thanks for the comment !
I guess this was your first official release, no worries, the criticism on here might seem harsh and hard to take on as a developer (especially when it's your first step in the medium) but I can only wish you the best, don't let the negative reviews bring you down in your work !
I'll be looking forward to your next project, feel free to reach out if there's anything you'd like to know.
Hey, thanks for the comment !
I guess this was your first official release, no worries, the criticism on here might seem harsh and hard to take on as a developer (especially when it's your first step in the medium) but I can only wish you the best, don't let the negative reviews bring you down in your work !
I'll be looking forward to your next project, feel free to reach out if there's anything you'd like to know.
@Batt Thanks for the support - the criticisms are a bit of a surprise considering the number of people who downloaded the project. I really wasn't expecting 50k downloads in a week (without even a trailer yet), and if I knew that this would be the case, I'd put more effort into it.
With that said, I'll take the offer to discuss some points with you. I'm new to this platform, is there a way to send private texts or something like that?
With that said, I'll take the offer to discuss some points with you. I'm new to this platform, is there a way to send private texts or something like that?
To me the main problem is the concept of "essay". This is not an essay. Maybe we got used to call everything an essay, specially in some internet circles. An essay is not just throwing some author's opinion about which is his/her favourite game.
This experiment, which is closer to an ordinary tweet, lacks any kind of critical analysis or depth and drops criticism to the games the author didn't like (like FFXVI), without giving real arguments (basically: RDR2 has external interaction but its well done because I like it, while FFXVI is a goofy meme because it follow classic jrpg elements. GOW is bad because treats people like stupid, etc. Reason: his taste).
The "final statement" is just an empty claim recognizing that SOTC is an amazing game because on how Fumito Ueda understands interactivity. Okay, thanks. First time I've heard it.
This kind of "analysis" is just an attempt to convince us that x game or genre (by extension) is objectively better than others -no discussion on how every game mentioned tries to merge all their gaming elements - FFXVI and GOW "fail" while RDR2 excels just because he says it so.
In any case, I hope the author gets some recognition, at least for the visual presentation. Calling it "essay" is way too much.
This experiment, which is closer to an ordinary tweet, lacks any kind of critical analysis or depth and drops criticism to the games the author didn't like (like FFXVI), without giving real arguments (basically: RDR2 has external interaction but its well done because I like it, while FFXVI is a goofy meme because it follow classic jrpg elements. GOW is bad because treats people like stupid, etc. Reason: his taste).
The "final statement" is just an empty claim recognizing that SOTC is an amazing game because on how Fumito Ueda understands interactivity. Okay, thanks. First time I've heard it.
This kind of "analysis" is just an attempt to convince us that x game or genre (by extension) is objectively better than others -no discussion on how every game mentioned tries to merge all their gaming elements - FFXVI and GOW "fail" while RDR2 excels just because he says it so.
In any case, I hope the author gets some recognition, at least for the visual presentation. Calling it "essay" is way too much.
NascarRedSox
3 months ago